law vs technology

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Recently there's been a great deal of discussion on this list
about upcoming legislations (HR666 S314 etc.).  Maybe it's time
to step back a little and look at the bigger picture.  I've
been assuming (perhaps incorrectly) for some time that most
cypherpunks hold a belief somewhat like the following:

There has never been a government that didn't sooner or later
try to reduce the freedom of its subjects and gain more control
over them, and there probably never will be one.  Therefore,
instead of trying to convince our current government not to
try, we'll develop the technology (e.g., remailers and ecash)
that will make it impossible for the government to succeed.
Efforts to influence the government (e.g., lobbying and
propaganda) are important only in so far as to delay its
attempted crackdown long enough for the technology to mature
and come into wide use.

But even if you do not believe the above is true, think about
it this way:  If you have a certain amount of time to spend on
advancing the cause of greater personal privacy (or freedom, or
cryptoanarchy, or whatever), can you do it better by using the
time to learn about cryptography and develop the tools to
protect privacy, or by convincing your government not to invade
your privacy?  I argue that since there are many more people
doing the former (EFF, CPSR, etc) than latter, that you'd be
more effective if you spent the time on the former.

Wei Dai


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBLzvayTl0sXKgdnV5AQEBvAP+MqsGer5pg2xM6+pYG7DgCSttUyAoG8I6
Hm/atFUdRauZ1WREpi3XTXEmNgT9m+QuON5+6rnUrfkizAdjr9EPFnXxMa8am8TZ
W7iQBuKb/KktbClbQyKzndeAOQ3oIOi4ahdn5eseOCWc3wX/WcjR6w9WJ6yPWoTJ
6fcglCGgo/8=
=Pc1V
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

E-mail: Wei Dai <weidai@eskimo.com>   URL: "http://www.eskimo.com/~weidai"
=================== Exponential Increase of Complexity ===================
--> singularity --> atoms --> macromolecules --> biological evolution
--> central nervous systems --> symbolic communication --> homo sapiens
--> digital computers --> internetworking --> close-coupled automation
--> broadband brain-to-net connections --> artificial intelligence
--> distributed consciousness --> group minds --> ? ? ?

Wei Dai writes:
> If you have a certain amount of time to spend on
> advancing the cause of greater personal privacy (or freedom, or
> cryptoanarchy, or whatever), can you do it better by using the
> time to learn about cryptography and develop the tools to
> protect privacy, or by convincing your government not to invade
> your privacy?  I argue that since there are many more people
> doing the former (EFF, CPSR, etc) than latter, that you'd be
> more effective if you spent the time on the former.

[Presumably you meant, "many more people doing the *latter* than *former*"]

Speaking strictly for myself, I agree. I'm relatively well-positioned to
design and produce privacy- and security-preserving protocols and programs.
OTOH, while I find politics absorbing, I don't have any special expertise or
influence. Once the legal scholars start to debate legislation, I step out
of the way.

There is, however, an awfully wide spectrum of interests and abilities 
among the subscribers to this list, from what I can tell. Plenty of people
here lack some of the requisite technical skills, but can offer significant
assistance in other ways. So I think your point applies to some people here,
but not everyone. 

I'm reminded of the controversy over the essential identity of cypherpunks.
There was interminable wrangling over who (if anyone) "owned" the list, 
whether the list and Cypherpunks were identical, etc. AFAI can tell, the list
comprises many of both run-of-the-mill privacy/security advocates (whatever 
that means) and Cypherpunks according to strict definitions as written by Tim 
and others.

As a separate issue, there are quite a few vocal opponents of groups such as
EFF on the list. I've no idea whether there's a silent majority ;) of lurkers
who fully support EFF et al., but I suspect a sizable chunk of the list
population disagrees that there are many people really fighting invasive govt.
action.

-L. Futplex McCarthy [seeking summer work, with a background in theoretical
                      computer science; private email inquiries welcomed]

L. Futplex McCarthy's reply to Wei Dei:

[ Snip! ]

> As a separate issue, there are quite a few vocal opponents of groups such as
> EFF on the list. I've no idea whether there's a silent majority ;) of lurkers
> who fully support EFF et al., but I suspect a sizable chunk of the list
> population disagrees that there are many people really fighting invasive govt.
> action.

There's an advantage of techies getting politically active, provided they
can explain the systems in an understandable way that is interesting, and
provided that these issues hit home to them (ie, that you're not talking
in technobabble and that they see the need for privacy technologies in
their own lives).

What I find harder to do is to get through to people who have given up on
the government not eroding what little rights remain, or who are already
afriad that the FBI/CIA/NSA/KGB/etc. are already watching their every move.

I'm working on a fax to send to congresspersons as a start. I'd like to
get local political action groups hip to the issues as well to get the ball
rolling in the right direction as well.